In 1990, a case came before the Ontario Human Rights Commission involving the collision of a religious rights policy enshrined in the Ontario Human Rights Code 1981 and a Peel Board of Education disciplinary policy prohibiting weapons including the kirpan, a dagger-like article of religious faith worn by baptized Sikhs. Harbhajan Singh Pandori claimed infringement of his religious rights as a Sikh under the Code. In a joint complaint, the Ontario Human Rights Commission alleged the Code had been violated in a Peel Board policy restricting the religious rights of Sikhs by prohibiting the kirpan. Attempts to mediate between complainant Sikhs and the Peel Board failed. The dispute went before an Ontario Human Rights Commission tribunal adjudicated by Rabbi W. Gunther Plaut who ruled that the kirpan was a religious symbol and could be worn to school subject to restrictions. The Pandori kirpan case illustrates the complexity of resolving issues of cultural and religious conflict in public institutions undergoing demographic change. Significant to the kirpan case were Canadian immigration policy changes which eliminated race and ethnicity from admission criteria. As a result, the Region of Peel witnessed significant intake of immigrants including Sikhs, some of whom insisted on their right to wear a kirpan. The extensive public debate that followed afforded valuable insight on the political process of policy-making in education and accommodating diversity in public educational institutions. The debate also set the stage for the development of the Peel Board’s equity policy documents--Manifesting Encouraging and Respectful Environments and The Future We Want launched in 2000. Despite the new equity documents, some observers have remarked that institutional change is slow unless pressure is applied by the courts or the Ontario Human Rights Commission. While the kirpan issue has been put to rest in Canada, issues of competing rights continue to challenge Canadians. The kirpan case demonstrates that balancing competing rights in a multicultural society is an ongoing struggle with no final resolution. In the twenty-first century, as Canada continues to diversify, debates concerning accommodation continue to be reflected in the public schools.

In 1990, a case came before the Ontario Human Rights Commission involving the collision of a religious rights policy enshrined in the Ontario Human Rights Code 1981 and a Peel Board of Education disciplinary policy prohibiting weapons including the kirpan, a dagger-like article of religious faith worn by baptized Sikhs. Harbhajan Singh Pandori claimed infringement of his religious rights as a Sikh under the Code. In a joint complaint, the Ontario Human Rights Commission alleged the Code had been violated in a Peel Board policy restricting the religious rights of Sikhs by prohibiting the kirpan. Attempts to mediate between complainant Sikhs and the Peel Board failed. The dispute went before an Ontario Human Rights Commission tribunal adjudicated by Rabbi W. Gunther Plaut who ruled that the kirpan was a religious symbol and could be worn to school subject to restrictions. The Pandori kirpan case illustrates the complexity of resolving issues of cultural and religious conflict in public institutions undergoing demographic change. Significant to the kirpan case were Canadian immigration policy changes which eliminated race and ethnicity from admission criteria. As a result, the Region of Peel witnessed significant intake of immigrants including Sikhs, some of whom insisted on their right to wear a kirpan. The extensive public debate that followed afforded valuable insight on the political process of policy-making in education and accommodating diversity in public educational institutions. The debate also set the stage for the development of the Peel Board’s equity policy documents--Manifesting Encouraging and Respectful Environments and The Future We Want launched in 2000. Despite the new equity documents, some observers have remarked that institutional change is slow unless pressure is applied by the courts or the Ontario Human Rights Commission. While the kirpan issue has been put to rest in Canada, issues of competing rights continue to challenge Canadians. The kirpan case demonstrates that balancing competing rights in a multicultural society is an ongoing struggle with no final resolution. In the twenty-first century, as Canada continues to diversify, debates concerning accommodation continue to be reflected in the public schools.

<p>This dissertation offers a critical analysis of State Anti-Racism in Ontario, Canada, from 1990 - 1995. Particular attention is paid to the politics surrounding the emergence and operation of a dedicated provincial agency - the Ontario Anti-Racism Secretariat (OARS). The study highlights the central role of social problems work and claims making in the determination of anti-racism policy.</p> <p>The nature of state anti-racisms in distinct areas of programming is accounted for in terms of the claims making activities of the parties involved in the policymaking process. I argue that stakeholders' influence on the nature of anti-racism initiatives varied depending on the particular realm of policy or programming under examination. State agents determined the nature of anti-racism in some areas, while community stakeholders held sway in other areas.</p> <p>The research draws on a variety of theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the state and racial inequality from sociology, political science, and policy studies. Qualitative methods including open-ended interviews and content analysis of archival materials are used to account for different dimensions of state anti-racisms.</p> <p>Empirical evidence for this study comes from accounts provided by key players involved with anti-racism in Ontario including representatives from community groups, the Ontario Public Sector (OPS), academia, media, and the Ontario New Democratic Party (ONDP). Materials housed at the Canadian Jewish Archives and the Provincial Archives of Ontario were also used.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)